How can you justify the sheer complexity that evolution would have to evolve?

[YoursTrue]

Yup you're a martyr and it's not like you ever harass other Christians for not believing what you believe <cough>

Well, of course, and here's where I might opt out for a while so you can engage others besides myself who do not agree with you -- if possible -- you might ask those here about their beliefs insofar as their ideas. Adios for now.

 

[YoursTrue]

I have backed up my claims more than enough with you. As have others. It gets to the point where you get put into "corrections only" mode where your false claims are corrected and evidence is at the discretion of the person correcting your errors. There are rules to debate and one of those is that both sides must be honest interlocutors. If one side is not then you free up the other side to behave in the same manner.

Hope you enjoy discussions backing up your opinions with others -- for a while I'm outta here...opting out as they say -- Have a good one, it's been an interesting excursion...

 

[John53]

Glad you asked. Finally! The detailed evidence would be the organisms that evolved in the stages said to move from certain types of fish to land animals. But of course there are none. But that's what I mean by detailed evidence. There is none. Only surmises gleaned from fossils.

And your expertise can pick this up yet virtually every palaeontologist is fooled. Amazing.

Here is my answer for that, whether you like it or not: (think about it) There are gods or other-worldly forces that can do things that appear astounding. But the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob will always be the Almighty God with power over all and He will exercise it at the right time, just as He did with Moses and the Hebrew people.

Life from non life is beyond astounding. If mere priests can do it I'd say abiogenisis is well and truly back on the table.

 

[John53]

Well, of course, and here's where I might opt out for a while so you can engage others besides myself who do not agree with you -- if possible -- you might ask those here about their beliefs insofar as their ideas. Adios for now.

Thanks for making me laugh and winning a bet for me.

 

[Kenny]

Oh, ok. I am not a follower of the Discovery Institute but will certainly keep your appraisal of the scientists there in mind. So you don't like the song "Amazing Grace"? I love the song and I do believe that not everyone singing that song believes what it says, but that's ok. I still know that God guided me and is still guiding me. (Have a good one...)

The story behind the song is beautiful

 

[Subduction Zone]

Glad you asked. Finally! The detailed evidence would be the organisms that evolved in the stages said to move from certain types of fish to land animals. But of course there are none. But that's what I mean by detailed evidence. There is none. Only surmises gleaned from fossils.

That is demonstrably false. We do have such critters. We simply do not have one from every generation, but that is not needed. When you demand evidence you have to be rational to make a demand and your demand is irrational. And it is also incredibly ignorant as well.

Here is my answer for that, whether you like it or not: (think about it) There are gods or other-worldly forces that can do things that appear astounding. But the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob will always be the Almighty God with power over all and He will exercise it at the right time, just as He did with Moses and the Hebrew people.

If that is the case how do you know that? You made the claim that puts the burden of proof upon you. If you cannot support that claim then I am just as valid as claiming that you are wrong, that it was the Flying Spaghetti Monster that did this because I know that Quob is the creator of the universe. I would not have to prove Quob since you refuse to prove your God.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Hope you enjoy discussions backing up your opinions with others -- for a while I'm outta here...opting out as they say -- Have a good one, it's been an interesting excursion...

I have already backed up my claims many times. Your refusal to enter into a proper discussion has been explained to you by many others besides just me. You are not a "victim' when your supposed wrongs were self inflicted.

 

[YoursTrue]

The story behind the song is beautiful

Yes, it is. I truly respect the song writer, love the song, glad he understood more about what God wanted as he gained maturity. Thank you, Kenny. (Sometimes my husband hears me singing it when I feel particularly privileged and thrilled to know more about God.)

 

[Valjean]

And you expertise can pick this up yet virtually every palaeontologist is fooled. Amazing.



Life from non life is beyond astounding. If mere priests can do it I'd say abiogenisis is well and truly back on the table.

Yes, it is. I truly respect the song writer, love the song, glad he understood more about what God wanted as he gained maturity. Thank you, Kenny. (Sometimes my husband hears me singing it when I feel particularly privileged and thrilled to know more about God.)

The song might have accurately portrayed the composer, but there's something disturbing about healthy people declaring themselves wretches. It smacks of psychopathology.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Hi, Kenny. Once again -- I was thinking...(lol) -- and of course many would put down the events that are written in the Bible that occurred between Moses and the Pharaoh. But Pharaoh's magic-practicing priests put out rods that turned into serpents. And then what happened? Moses put out rods that also turned into serpents. So while nay-sayers accuse those who believe in a Creator of believing in "magic" rather than "natural causes," I see they will not admit there is nothing to back up their ideas other than various and sundry fossils that really do not show the miniscule mutational changes that fish, for example, evolved eventually to humans. Can I explain it any further than that in terms of what precisely took place as God created the heavens and the earth? Nope. But surely neither can scientists who believe in the process of evolution really detail their case with detailed evidence. It's all conjecture about what happened.

Exodus 7!10-14
So Moses and Aaron went to Pharaoh and did just as the Lord commanded. Aaron threw his staff down in front of Pharaoh and his officials, and it became a snake. 11Pharaoh then summoned wise men and sorcerers, and the Egyptian magicians also did the same things by their secret arts: 12Each one threw down his staff and it became a snake. But Aaron’s staff swallowed up their staffs. 13Yet Pharaoh’s heart became hard and he would not listen to them, just as the Lord had said.
14Then the Lord said to Moses, “Pharaoh heart is unyielding."

Regarding your comments on ‘fish & evolution’ you might appreciate researching the topic “radiations in the diversity of life” like the mammalian radiation (some radiations are classified as “explosions” as in Cambrian).

New “body plans” —that’s what biologists / paleontologists call it — are suddenly found in the strata, without obvious “precursors”, i.e., similar-looking ancestors, in the lower strata.

Since evolutionary processes have no intelligence, we know the first organisms of these radiations, with their “de novo” (a Latin expression used in English to mean 'from the beginning', 'anew') body plans, were created.

Of course, the biased shallow-thinkers will have a field day with this.

Take care.

 

[Valjean]

Regarding your comments on ‘fish & evolution’ you might appreciate researching the topic “radiations in the diversity of life” like the mammalian radiation (some radiations are classified as “explosions” as in Cambrian).

Not "classified." More "editorialized" by the media to generate interest.

New “body plans” —that’s what biologists / paleontologists call it — are suddenly found in the strata, without obvious “precursors”, i.e., similar-looking ancestors, in the lower strata.

"Suddenly" being millions of years, with several factors being more likely contributors than magic proofing.

Since evolutionary processes have no intelligence, we know the first organisms of these radiations, with their “de novo” (a Latin expression used in English to mean 'from the beginning', 'anew') body plans, were created.

How does that follow? They evolved.
Environmental changes tend to accelerate evolution, and successful adaptations to novel circumstances can spread quickly through a population.

Of course, the biased shallow-thinkers will have a field day with this.

Which side are you calling shallow thinkers, the educated, who do think, or the ignorant who don't?
Why is there a direct relationship between familiarity with the subject and belief in evolution?
Have you heard of the Dunning-Kruger effect?

 

[McBell]

Of course, the biased shallow-thinkers will have a field day with this.

It certainly does sound like something Creationists will double and triple down on.

I mean, thinking does not get any more shallow than declaring "GodDidIt".

 

[Subduction Zone]

Regarding your comments on ‘fish & evolution’ you might appreciate researching the topic “radiations in the diversity of life” like the mammalian radiation (some radiations are classified as “explosions” as in Cambrian).

New “body plans” —that’s what biologists / paleontologists call it — are suddenly found in the strata, without obvious “precursors”, i.e., similar-looking ancestors, in the lower strata.

Since evolutionary processes have no intelligence, we know the first organisms of these radiations, with their “de novo” (a Latin expression used in English to mean 'from the beginning', 'anew') body plans, were created.

Of course, the biased shallow-thinkers will have a field day with this.

Take care.

Please be specific. I don't know of any such cases except for the. Cambrian explosion and that one exception is rather well understood. Are you aware that there was complex life before the Cambrian explosion? But by using this argument you do not appear to have any objection at all to the fact that we are still apes. In fact you admit that we are still "fish" using this argument if yours.

 

[YoursTrue]

Regarding your comments on ‘fish & evolution’ you might appreciate researching the topic “radiations in the diversity of life” like the mammalian radiation (some radiations are classified as “explosions” as in Cambrian).

New “body plans” —that’s what biologists / paleontologists call it — are suddenly found in the strata, without obvious “precursors”, i.e., similar-looking ancestors, in the lower strata.

Since evolutionary processes have no intelligence, we know the first organisms of these radiations, with their “de novo” (a Latin expression used in English to mean 'from the beginning', 'anew') body plans, were created.

Of course, the biased shallow-thinkers will have a field day with this.

Take care.

I have been researching it. Frankly speaking, the idea that a turtle or tortoise as exemplified in one of the science publications I was reading as if it evolved, and came about by "natural selection" after lots and lots of time from a couple of cells way back when is -- um -- really more like science fiction. But if (some) people want to believe that's how skin, flesh, bones and other things like that came about, that is what they think. believe and accept. I used to. The theoretical explanations are continual figuring how it probably happened. But they don't really know that, even if some say they do. The more I research the findings of scientific pundits the clearer it becomes to me that the basic foundations of selection of the fittest and "natural selection" are what these ponderers are relying upon. The theory is there and many scientists no longer question out loud or in writing whether it is true -- they may keep finding pieces and put them in line of the puzzle frame. Without real basis beyond belief that it all happened by natural causes without any superior intelligent designer.

 

[YoursTrue]

No, you believe that God guided you. Knowledge is public and once again puts the burden of proof upon you. There is nothing wrong with saying "I believe . . . ". Belief is private I cannot say that you do not believe something unless you give clear evidence that you do not believe what you claimed to believe. If you say "I believe . . ." then you often put the burden of proof upon others if they want to change your mind. But when you say "I know" that means that you can show how know what you claim to know.

I believe God answered my prayer after I finally prayed after many years of not praying. Saying "I believe" in essence means to me that there is no doubt in my mind as to what happened. Looking back on it, there is no doubt in my mind God heard my prayer and answered me even though at the time I did not realize it. I always like the experience of the apostle Paul after his conversion -- not everyone believes him. But he knew what he knew and shared it with others. And yes, was persecuted for it. And suffered, just as he was told by Christ yet because of his love of God he continued. And, by the way, the "return" of Christ is a subject that interested ones can discuss and understand. Without God's help (his spirit), however, it is impossible to understand.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I believe God answered my prayer after I finally prayed after many years of not praying. Saying "I believe" in essence means to me that there is no doubt in my mind as to what happened. Looking back on it, there is no doubt in my mind God heard my prayer and answered me even though at the time I did not realize it. I always like the experience of the apostle Paul after his conversion -- not everyone believes him. But he knew what he knew and shared it with others. And yes, was persecuted for it. And suffered, just as he was told by Christ yet because of his love of God he continued. And, by the way, the "return" of Christ is a subject that interested ones can discuss and understand. Without God's help (his spirit), however, it is impossible to understand.

And no one is doubting that you believe that. It is similar to almost identical beliefs that people from other religions have as well. In other words it is not evidence for any God. And lacking doubt is very often a bad thing. It leads to poor judgements quite often. Now I can understand why recovered addicts are often so strong in their beliefs. They have a well merited fear of going back to their old ways. But again, that in now way means that they are right. Plus a strong belief is not the same as a strong faith. If someone has a strong faith in God they will believe in him no matter how the world was made. They will not be so arrogant as to tell God how he had to make the world. That is a huge mistake that many fundamentalists make. Instead of worshipping in and believing in God they worship the Bible. That is not at all the same thing.

 

[YoursTrue]

And no one is doubting that you believe that. It is similar to almost identical beliefs that people from other religions have as well. In other words it is not evidence for any God. And lacking doubt is very often a bad thing. It leads to poor judgements quite often. Now I can understand why recovered addicts are often so strong in their beliefs. They have a well merited fear of going back to their old ways. But again, that in now way means that they are right. Plus a strong belief is not the same as a strong faith. If someone has a strong faith in God they will believe in him no matter how the world was made. They will not be so arrogant as to tell God how he had to make the world. That is a huge mistake that many fundamentalists make. Instead of worshipping in and believing in God they worship the Bible. That is not at all the same thing.

I have no fear of going back to my old ways before I knew God. It is like from night to day to me. Still, I know I am not yet perfect. I can't speak for others but what I did before I became a Christian (yes, one of Jehovah's Witnesses) I cannot imagine doing again. Whether you agree or not, I believe I have been washed clean. And I am so happy about it. What I now consider wrong n God's eyes, obviously others might not agree.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I have no fear of going back to my old ways before I knew God. It is like from night to day to me. Still, I know I am not yet perfect. I can't speak for others but what I did before I became a Christian (yes, one of Jehovah's Witnesses) I cannot imagine doing again. Whether you agree or not, I believe I have been washed clean. And I am so happy about it. What I now consider wrong n God's eyes, obviously others might not agree.

Then why are you so afraid to learn? Once again, a strong belief is not the same as a strong faith. For the religious a strong faith is superior since those people do not try to tell God how he made the world. And that is what you do instead of reading the record that was left behind by the Earth. Yes, God could have lied by planting false evidence, but how could anyone trust a God that lies in that manner? It is far more rational to believe that God does not lie.

 

[YoursTrue]

Then why are you so afraid to learn?

I'm not afraid to learn. But when and if I have a question of you and some others here I am often reviled and so this is not a way to learn for me. If you deny that, again -- there is nothing to discuss about these things, in this instance between you and me.

Once again, a strong belief is not the same as a strong faith. For the religious a strong faith is superior since those people do not try to tell God how he made the world. And that is what you do instead of reading the record that was left behind by the Earth. Yes, God could have lied by planting false evidence, but how could anyone trust a God that lies in that manner? It is far more rational to believe that God does not lie.

I believe again here you are making a false accusation of me as if I am telling God what to believe or do. And since you keep saying that my God lies, there is really nothing to discuss between the two of us about these things. Just as evolutionists' cannot explain everything, neither can I explain everything in the Bible. Maybe one day, but not now. Have a good one and be well.

 

[McBell]

And since you keep saying that my God lies,

When/where has @Subduction Zone said your God lies?
I have not seen them tell anyone that their god is a liar.

They have stated, and rightfully so, that many a theists call their own god a liar.